Definitely no or maybe yes: what tipped the Icelandic referendum | Miranda Bryant

The fate of Iceland's future with the European Union hung in the balance as the nation went to the polls in a referendum that divided the country.

With a population of just over 400,000, the margins were expected to be tight, and the results did not disappoint. After a tense overnight count, the "no" campaign emerged victorious, securing 52.8% of the vote.

The well-funded and vocal opposition to EU negotiations focused on fears surrounding Iceland's national identity and the potential impact on its fishing and farming industries. These two sectors are deeply intertwined with the country's sense of self, and the "no" campaign's message resonated strongly with voters, particularly in rural areas.

The ballot question itself may have also played a pivotal role. Icelanders were asked if they wanted to "resume accession negotiations with the EU," leaving room for interpretation and uncertainty. A "yes" vote would have been a tentative step towards further integration, while a "no" vote offered a more definitive stance.

The "yes, maybe" campaign's slogan, "Já til að sjá" ("yes to see"), lacked the clarity and conviction of the "no" campaign's claims. They warned of an EU "superpower" and the potential loss of control over Iceland's valuable fishing industry, fears that struck a chord with many voters.

At a "yes" campaign gathering, supporters acknowledged the powerful messaging of their opponents. Þòrir Snoor, a "yes" advocate, commented on the fearmongering tactics employed by the "no" side, which had successfully influenced many, including his peers.

Despite the defeat, Iceland's foreign minister, Þórdís Kolbrún R. Gylfadóttir, emphasized the importance of continuing the dialogue and finding a path forward that respects the will of the Icelandic people.